IP Library Granted Patent US 12,452,282
Granted Patent B2
US 12,452,282 · App. 18/139,296 · Granted Oct 21, 2025

Access prediction service serving explainable risk scores

Inventors: Darryl Jones (Princeton, NJ); Raminder Deep Singh Kaler (Redwood City, CA); Peter Barker (Austin, TX); Sudhakar Peddibhotla (Seattle, WA)
Assignee: Ping Identity International, Inc.
H04L63/1433H04L63/083H04L63/1425H04L2463/082
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,452,282
App. No.
18/139,296
Granted
Oct 21, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

A process, system and medium for detecting anomalous authentication requests to a protected resource during an authentication journey, in order to regulate step-up authentication are described. The process includes obtaining request features from the authentication request that triggered the authentication journey. The process includes processing, by an ensemble of Machine Learning (ML) models and a set of rule-based heuristics, a set of features based on the request features, the set of features associated with a userID. The process includes deriving risk sub-scores for each ML model and each heuristic. The process includes deriving a risk score based on the risk sub-scores. The process includes determining that the risk score exceeds an explanation-triggering threshold. The process includes providing, to a node in the authentication journey, the risk score with an explanation of the risk score. The system and medium are configured to execute the process, and configured to provide the explanation.

Claims (74)

1. A method for detecting anomalous authentication requests to a customer endpoint during an authentication journey, in order to conditionally invoke step-up authentication, the method comprising:

obtaining request features from an authentication request that triggered the authentication journey;

processing, by an ensemble of Machine Learning (ML) models and a set of rule-based heuristics, a set of features based on the request features, the set of features associated with a userID, the ensemble of ML models comprising unsupervised learning models including at least one k-mode clustering model and at least one encoder-decoder model, each cluster member of the at least one k-mode clustering model representing a distinct userID;

deriving a risk sub-score for each ML model from the ensemble of ML models and each heuristic from the set of rule-based heuristics, the risk sub-score for the at least one k-mode clustering model being based on a set of request features compared to a k-mode cluster-mode of the at least one k-mode clustering model;

generating an explanation of at least one risk sub-score;

deriving a risk score based on the risk sub-score for each ML model from the ensemble of ML models and each heuristic from the set of rule-based heuristics;

determining that the risk score exceeds an explanation-triggering threshold; and

providing, to a node in the authentication journey, the risk score with an explanation of the risk score,

whereby the risk score and the explanation can be used to determine whether to invoke step-up authentication.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the at least one encoder-decoder model includes at least a variational autoencoder (VAE), and the explanation of the at least one risk sub-score includes an explanation for the risk sub-score of the VAE.

3. The method of claim 1 , wherein the set of rule-based heuristics includes at least 4 of:

Impossible traveler,

Credential stuffing,

Brute force,

Suspicious IP, or

Automated User Agent (aka bot).

4. The method of claim 1 , wherein the set of features includes at least 3 or more request features of:

geographical country from which the authentication request originated,

geographical city from which the authentication request originated,

device type from which the authentication request originated,

day of week on which the authentication request was received,

part of day in which the authentication request was received,

OS type from which the authentication request was sent, or

user agent from which the authentication request was sent.

5. The method of claim 4 , wherein the set of features includes at least 5 or more of the request features.

6. A non-transitory computer-readable medium configured with instructions to detect anomalous authentication requests to a protected resource during an authentication journey in order to conditionally invoke step-up authentication, the instructions, when executed, implement a method comprising:

obtaining request features from an authentication request that triggered the authentication journey;

processing, by an ensemble of Machine Learning (ML) models and a set of rule-based heuristics, a set of features based on the request features, the set of features associated with a userID, the ensemble of ML models comprising unsupervised learning models including at least one k-mode clustering model and at least one encoder-decoder model, each cluster member of the at least one k-mode clustering model representing a distinct userID;

deriving a risk sub-score for each ML model from the ensemble of ML models and each heuristic from the set of rule-based heuristics, the risk sub-score for the at least one k-mode clustering model being based on a set of request features compared to a k-mode cluster-mode of the at least one k-mode clustering model;

generating an explanation of at least one risk sub-score;

deriving a risk score based on the risk sub-score for each ML model from the ensemble of ML models and each heuristic from the set of rule-based heuristics;

determining that the risk score exceeds an explanation-triggering threshold; and

providing, to a node in the authentication journey, the risk score with an explanation of the risk score,

whereby the risk score and the explanation can be used to determine whether to invoke step-up authentication.

7. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 6 , wherein the at least one encoder-decoder model includes at least a variational autoencoder (VAE), and the explanation of the at least one risk sub-score includes an explanation for the risk sub-score of the VAE.

8. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 6 , wherein the set of rule-based heuristics includes at least 4 of:

Impossible traveler,

Credential stuffing,

Brute force,

Suspicious IP, or

Automated User Agent (aka bot).

9. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 6 , wherein the set of features includes at least 3 or more request features of:

geographical country from which the authentication request originated,

geographical city from which the authentication request originated,

device type from which the authentication request originated,

day of week on which the authentication request was received,

part of day in which the authentication request was received,

OS type from which the authentication request was sent, or

user agent from which the authentication request was sent.

10. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 9 , wherein the set of features includes at least 5 or more of the request features.

11. A system, including a processor operatively connected to a non-transitory computer-readable medium with instructions that, when executed, perform steps of a method for detecting anomalous authentication requests to a protected resource during an authentication journey in order to conditionally invoke step-up authentication, the method comprising:

obtaining request features from an authentication request that triggered the authentication journey;

processing, by an ensemble of Machine Learning (ML) models and a set of rule-based heuristics, a set of features based on the request features, the set of features associated with a userID, the ensemble of ML models comprising unsupervised learning models including at least one k-mode clustering model and at least one encoder-decoder model, each cluster member of the at least one k-mode clustering model representing a distinct userID;

deriving a risk sub-score for each ML model from the ensemble of ML models and each heuristic from the set of rule-based heuristics, the risk sub-score for the at least one k-mode clustering model being based on a set of request features compared to a k-mode cluster-mode of the at least one k-mode clustering model;

generating an explanation of at least one risk sub-score;

deriving a risk score based on the risk sub-score for each ML model from the ensemble of ML models and each heuristic from the set of rule-based heuristics;

determining that the risk score exceeds an explanation-triggering threshold; and

providing, to a node in the authentication journey, the risk score with an explanation of the risk score,

whereby the risk score and the explanation can be used to determine whether to invoke step-up authentication.

12. The system of claim 11 , wherein the at least one encoder-decoder model includes at least a variational autoencoder (VAE), and the explanation of the at least one risk sub-score includes an explanation for the risk sub-score of the VAE.

13. The system of claim 11 , wherein the set of rule-based heuristics includes at least 4 of:

Impossible traveler,

Credential stuffing,

Brute force,

Suspicious IP, or

Automated User Agent (aka bot).

14. The system of claim 11 , wherein the set of features includes at least 3 or more request features of:

geographical country from which the authentication request originated,

geographical city from which the authentication request originated,

device type from which the authentication request originated,

day of week on which the authentication request was received,

part of day in which the authentication request was received,

OS type from which the authentication request was sent, or

user agent from which the authentication request was sent.

Assignments (3)
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Nov 13, 2025
From: PING IDENTITY CORPORATION; PING IDENTITY INTERNATIONAL, INC.
To: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.
Reel/Frame 073557/0093 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Feb 6, 2024
From: FORGEROCK, INC.
To: PING IDENTITY INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Reel/Frame 066358/0483 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded May 8, 2023
From: KALER, RAMINDER DEEP SINGH; BARKER, PETER; PEDDIBHOLTA, SUDHAKAR; JONES, DARRYL
To: FORGEROCK, INC.
Reel/Frame 063565/0176 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20240364730A1 · Oct 31, 2024
References Cited (52)
US 10303576B1 · Seymour et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 11182468B1 · Walters · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 12093950B2 · John · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 12229768B2 · John · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 20150205708A1 · Michelsen · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20160140023A1 · Michelsen et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160217062A1 · Singi et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170295062A1 · Tang · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20180189033A1 · Narang et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190087075A1 · Dhayanithi et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190392450A1 · Gosset et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20200125483A1 · Lipke · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20210004253A1 · Barnes et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210072966A1 · Zong et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210194883A1 · Badhwar · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20220108701A1 · Gupta et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220210151A1 · Williams · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20240107301A1 · Koral et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20240195819A1 · Grajek · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20240362316A1 · Peddibhotla et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20240428306A1 · Sliwka et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
Akers, A., What Is Step-Up Authentication When To Use It?, Okta, Auth0 Blog, Dec. 17, 2020, 14 pages (downloaded Apr. 6, 2023 from https://auth0.com/blog/what-is-step-up-authentication-when-to-use-it/. [cited by applicant]
Distinguish step-up from multi-factor authentication, IBM, Mar. 9, 2021, 2 pages, (downloaded Apr. 6, 2023 from https:// www.ibm.com/docs/en/sva/9.0.1?topic=authentication-distinguish-step-up-from-multi-factor). [cited by applicant]
Jordan, J., Variational autoencoders, JeremyJordan.me, Mar. 19, 2019, 15 pages (downloaded Mar. 21, 2023 from https://www.jeremyjordan.me/variational-autoencoders/). [cited by applicant]
About Autonomous Access—ForgeRock Identity Cloud Docs, ForgeRock, Inc. May 2022, 27 pages (downloaded Dec. 12, 2022 from https://backstage.forgerock.com/docs/idcloud/latest/auto-access/chap-about-autoaccess.html). [cited by applicant]
Huang, Z., Extensions to the k-Means Algorithm for Clustering Large Data Sets with Categorical Values, Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 2, 283-304 Sep. 1998 Kluwer Academic Publishers, 22 pages (https://doi.org/10.1… [cited by applicant]
“Theme Node, Dynamically theme the ForgeRock out-of-the-box US on the fly”, Oct. 2020, ForgeRock, Inc.,pp. 5 pgs. (downloaded from https://web.archive.org/web/20201024234908/https://backstage.forgerock.com/marketplace/e… [cited by applicant]
“Theme Node, Dynamically theme the ForgeRock out-of-the-box US on the fly”, Apr. 2020, ForgeRock, Inc.,, 8 pgs (downloaded from https://github.com/vscheuber/ThemeNode). [cited by applicant]
McKendrick, What is low-code and no-code? A guide to development platforms, ZDNet, Mar. 3, 2021,9 pgs (downloaded from https://www.zdnet.com/article/special-report-what-is-low-code-no-code-a-guide-to-development-platfor… [cited by applicant]
Authentication and Single Sign-On Guide, ForgeRock Access Management 6.5, ForgeRock, Inc., Jul. 4, 2019, 482 pages. [cited by applicant]
Release Notes, AM 5.0.0, ForgeRock, Inc., Jun. 2, 2020. [cited by applicant]
Protect Users Witthout Frustrating Them Using Al-Driven Behavorial Biometrics, White Pater, Behavion Sec, 2020, (retrieved Dec. 14, 2021 from https://www.behaviosec.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/bhs-whitepaper.pdf). [cited by applicant]
Behavioral Biometrics for Mobile, BioCatch, 2021, 3 pages (retrieved Dec. 14, 2021 from https://www.biocatch.com/hubfs/New%20Boilerplate/BC%20SB%20Mobile%20Data%20v6%20NBP.pdf). [cited by applicant]
Innovating the Customer Experience Without Opening Fraud Floodgates, BioCatch, 10 pages (retrieved Dec. 14, 2021 from https://www.biocatch.com/hubfs/WP-Innovate-Customer-Experience-Without-Fraud.pdf). [cited by applicant]
Threat Matrix Guide, ID Dataweb, 7 pages (retrieved Dec. 14, 2021 from https://docs.iddataweb.com/docs/threatmetrix-1). [cited by applicant]
Cichonski et al., “Computer Security Incident Handling Guide”, National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce, Special Publication 800-61, Revision 2, http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-6… [cited by applicant]
“Hardening your cluster's security”, Kubernetes Engine, (https://cloud.google.com/kubernetes-engine/docs/concepts/security-overview), Jul. 2019, 10 pages. [cited by applicant]
Dempsey, et al., “Information Security Continuous Monitoring (ISCM) for Federal Information Systems and Organizations”, NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NIST Special Publicati… [cited by applicant]
“Configuring Vertical Pod Autoscaling”, Kubernetes Engine, Google Cloud (https://cloud.google.com/kubernetes-engine/), Aug. 14, 2019, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Wilkin, “Kubernetes Deployment Dependencies”, https://medium.com/google-cloud/kubernetes-deployment-dependencies-ef703e563956, Jul. 2, 2018, 21 pages. [cited by applicant]
“Vertical Pod Autoscaling”, Kubernetes Engine, https://cloud.google.com/kubernetes-engine/docs/concepts/verticalpodautoscaler), Aug. 29, 2019, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Sakimura et al, “OpenID Connect Dynamic Client Registration 1.0 incorporating errata set 1”, https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-registration-1_0.html, Oct. 1, 2019, 19 pages. [cited by applicant]
Jayanandana, “Enable Rolling updates in Kubernetes with Zero downtime”, https://medium.com/platformer-blog/enable-rolling-updates-in-kubernetes-with-zero-downtime-31d7ec.388c81, Sep. 27, 2018, 6 pages. [cited by applicant]
“FAQ: IDM/OpenIDM performance and tuning”, https://backstage.forgerock.com/knowledge/kb/article/a32504603, Jun. 26, 2019, 7 pages. [cited by applicant]
Amazon; AWS Elastic Beanstalk Developer Guide; Aug. 2019; 924 pgs (https://web.archive.org/web/20190805110626/https:// docs.aws.amazon.com/elasticbeanstalk/latest/dg/awseb-dg.pdf). [cited by applicant]
Kingma et al, Auto-Encoding Variational Bayes, arXiv:1312.6114v11 [stat.ML] Dec. 10, 2022]. [cited by applicant]
U.S. Appl. No. 18/139,290, filed Apr. 25, 2023, Pending. [cited by applicant]
U.S. Appl. No. 18/139,295, filed Apr. 25, 2023, Pending. [cited by applicant]
U.S. Appl. No. 16/790,724, filed Feb. 13, 2020, U.S. Pat. No. 11,586,530, Feb. 21, 2023, Granted. [cited by applicant]
U.S. Appl. No. 18/111,501, filed Feb. 17, 2023, Pending. [cited by applicant]
U.S. Appl. No. 17/673,692, filed Feb. 16, 2022, US 2022/026383, Aug. 18, 2022, Pending. [cited by applicant]
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 18/139,295 mailed Feb. 14, 2025, 11 pages. [cited by applicant]